Thursday, 13 August 2015

Blair's attempt to stop Corbyn is the reason to do the opposite.

 At least in his article in the  Guardian entitled

Even if you hate me, please don’t take Labour over the cliff edge 

Tony Blair may have realised that he is not universally loved  but in his attept to stop Jeremy Corbyn leadership Juggernaut he clearly doesn't understand tha\t a great deal of people in these Islands are fed up with the right wing consensus 

 
The unions in the 1980s were, by a majority, a force for stability and sense. There were constituencies so solidly Labour that nothing could shake them from their loyalty. The party that assembled after the 1983 defeat knew its direction. Maybe we didn’t know how far or how fast, but we knew, and the new leader Neil Kinnock knew, that we had to put aside the delusion that we had lost two elections because we weren’t leftwing enough and start to modernise. And our objective was to return to government.
Well he may have a point  in that the right in the Labour Party were buffeted by the Unions . But it is ironic that Blair went about dismantling the Unions influenced in the Party once he believed  the left were defeated 
What we’re witnessing now is a throwback to that time, but without the stabilisers in place. The big unions, with the exception of the most successful in recent times, USDAW, are in the grip of the hard left. And the people do not have that same old-time loyalty.

Blair  took that loyalty away . He did nothing to reverse the anti-union laws of the Thatcher government and saw the Unions merely as cash cow for the  party. The fact that the Unions may no longer see Labour as representing their members is because they don't
If Jeremy Corbyn becomes leader it won’t be a defeat like 1983 or 2015 at the next election. It will mean rout, possibly annihilation. If he wins the leadership, the public will at first be amused, bemused and even intrigued. But as the years roll on, as Tory policies bite and the need for an effective opposition mounts – and oppositions are only effective if they stand a hope of winning – the public mood will turn to anger. They will seek to punish us. They will see themselves as victims not only of the Tory government but of our self-indulgence.
How can you be an effective opposition if only 48 Labour MPs voted against the Welfare Bil on the 20 July   not that the majority of what is supposed  to be "Her Majesty's Most Loyal Opposition" didn't
Jeremy Corbyn doesn’t offer anything new. This is literally the most laughable of all the propositions advanced by his camp. Those of us who lived through the turmoil of the 80s know every line of this script. These are policies from the past that were rejected not because they were too principled, but because a majority of the British people thought they didn’t work. And by the way, they were rejected by electorates round the world for the same reasons.
Blair does not seem to relies the financial crisis and the Austerity program that the Tories in which the current Labour party have failed to oppose has left many particular the hard hit poorest members of our communities disillusioned. Blair should ask not why did some of voters switch to the right . But why did so many fail to vote .y
 Even more so today, they do not think their challenges can be met by old-fashioned state control as the way to personal or social empowerment; they do not think breaking up Nato unilaterally is sensible; and they realise that a party without a serious deficit-reduction plan is not in these times a serious contender to govern them.

A fair number of people  are beginning  to realise that maybe NATO simply means obeying the U.S. policy of you are either with us or against us.

To be lectured on this by a former Prime Minister who is hugely responsible for the current situation in the Middle East where there is hardly one stable government would be laughable if it wasn't so tragic.

I am not a member of the Labour party and even if Jeremy Corbyn  was to win I would stilt not join so its not for me to say how members should vote. But maybe I can say they shouldn't,t listen to a vainglorious  war criminal.

No comments:

Post a Comment